Abstract
AbstractThere is abundant research on the use of concept maps in education. However, the most notable efforts have focused on learning outcomes as a consequence of individually constructed concept mapping for science concept learning. In the less explored field of history, some studies have found positive effects of collaborative concept mapping. However, student interaction has not been analyzed. This study employed quantitative and qualitative methods based on classroom discourse analysis to examine the extent to which students engage in historical reasoning and transactive interaction when they collaboratively complete a semiempty concept map, versus when they collaboratively write a summary, about 19th-century Western imperialism.The participants were 20 secondary education students from two history classes with an average age of 16 years. Within each class, the students were randomly assigned to the different conditions: collaborative concept mapping and collaborative summary writing. Student interaction was analyzed at two different levels: the content level and modes of co-construction. The results show that the students in the semiempty concept mapping condition engaged significantly more in causal explanation and argumentation and used more historical and metahistorical concepts in their reasoning than the students in the summary writing condition. Interaction in the semiempty concept mapping condition included a much higher percentage of utterances which denoted the convergence and integration of the knowledge contributed by the partners in the dyad. This kind of transactive interaction not only reflected co-construction but also historical reasoning.
Funder
Universidad de Extremadura
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference50 articles.
1. Armbruster, B., & Anderson, T. (1984). Mapping: Representing informative text diagrammatically. In C. D. Holley, D.F. Dansereau (Eds.), Spatial Learning Strategies (pp. 189–209). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-352620-5.50015-1.
2. Berkowitz, M. W., & Gibbs, J. C. (1983). Measuring the developmental features of moral discussion. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 29, 399–410.
3. Blunt, J. R., & Karpicke, J. D. (2014). Learning with retrieval-based concept mapping. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(3), 849–858. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035934.
4. Brown, A. L., & Day, J. D. (1983). Macrorules for summarizing texts: The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(83)80002-4.
5. Cañas, J. A., Bunch, L., Novak, J. D., & Reiska, P. (2013). Cmapanalysis: An extensible concept map analysis tool. Journal for educators. Teachers and Trainers, 4(1), 36–46.